Results of “E-FACTS” WP4

Results of “E-FACTS” WP4 Next generation EV users and their needs

Faculty 1: Architecture ∙ Civil Engineering ∙ Geomatics Department New Mobility

© Frankfurt UAS

E-FACTS – WP4 Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences

1

Results of “E-FACTS” WP4 Next generation EV users and their needs

Authors:

Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Faculty 1: Architecture ∙ Civil Engineering ∙ Geomatics

Department New Mobility

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Petra K. Schäfer | Dominic Hofmann M. Sc. | Christina Wolking B. Sc.

Frankfurt/Main, June 2015


2

Structure

List of figures .............................................................................................................................. 3

1 Introduction and objectives of work package 4 .................................................................. 4

2 General comparison and requirements of the participating countries .............................. 5

3 Quantitative and qualitative surveys .................................................................................. 8

3.1 Survey “erster!” – Electric vehicles for craft businesses in Frankfurt ......................... 8

3.1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................. 8

3.1.2 Methods ................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.3 Results ...................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Survey “Klassikstadt” – First experiences with electric vehicles ............................... 21

3.2.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................... 21

3.2.2 Methods ................................................................................................................. 21

3.2.3 Results .................................................................................................................... 21

3.3 Survey “Arnhem” – Demand of public charging facilities ......................................... 24

3.3.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................... 24

3.3.2 Methods ................................................................................................................. 24

3.3.3 Results .................................................................................................................... 24

3.4 Expert interviews ....................................................................................................... 25

3.4.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................... 25

3.4.2 Methods ................................................................................................................. 25

3.4.3 Results .................................................................................................................... 25

4 Conclusion and Outlook .................................................................................................... 34

5 References ......................................................................................................................... 37


3

List of figures

Figure 1: Type of vehicles (CS) .................................................................................................. 10

Figure 2: Source of energy (CS) ................................................................................................ 11

Figure 3: Users per day (T0) ..................................................................................................... 11

Figure 4: Usage of the electric vehicle (T2) .............................................................................. 12

Figure 5: Distances on business per day (T0) ........................................................................... 13

Figure 6: Necessary range (T1) ................................................................................................. 14

Figure 7: Necessary range (T2) ................................................................................................. 14

Figure 8: Driving performance (T1) .......................................................................................... 16

Figure 9: Problems in the operational process (T2) ................................................................. 17

Figure 10: Willingness of the purchase price (T0) .................................................................... 18

Figure 11: Communication of the experiences (T2) ................................................................. 20

Figure 12: Purposes of travel ................................................................................................... 22

Figure 13: Important using conditions ..................................................................................... 22

Figure 14: Experts’ origin.......................................................................................................... 25

Figure 15: Experts clustered by type of institution .................................................................. 26

Figure 16: Distribution of the opinions towards EU-projects .................................................. 29

Figure 17: Development of different e-mobility technologies ................................................ 32


4

1 Introduction and objectives of work package 4

The Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences (Frankfurt UAS) is responsible for the

accompanying research of the E-FACTS project. The general goal is, to identify the next

generation of electric vehicle (EV) users and their needs. This means, to identify and point

out ways to remove barriers to uptake the number of EVs. Legal, social, economic and

behavioral aspects are relevant. More precisely, the needs of customers to adopt the EV-

technology and the reaction to incentives were identified. With the subsided projects in the

participating cities, the knowledge on sustainability and environmental factors were taken

into account as well.

During the project meetings with the entire E-FACTS partners, the procedure of the

accompanying research was attuned. Suggestions of the Frankfurt UAS were discussed and

the proposals of the procedure were adjusted. Further necessary agreements were

coordinated by e-mail or by telephone.

The following chapters describe the objectives, methods and results of every implemented

survey. At first, a general comparison and requirements of the participating countries

introduce into the topic and display the most significant developments in the field of electromobility within this project. After the three basic surveys are delineated, the expert

interviews complete that chapter. The document ends with a conclusion, which describes

the results in a compact shape.


5

2 General comparison and requirements of the participating countries

The E-FACTS project members are out of three different cities from three different countries.

As a basement of the surveys, a general comparison of the requirements in the different

countries is necessary. Regarding various legal guidelines and laws, different kind of habits or

differing technologies and infrastructure standards, a comparison is quite challenging.

The local E-FACTS projects are concentrated on inner-city transport. Today, 25% of the CO²

emissions from transport are caused by urban transport. The European goal is, phasing out

the conventionally-fuelled vehicles from the urban environment. That would be a major

contribution to significant reduction of oil dependence, greenhouse gas emissions and local

air and noise pollution (European Commission, 2011).

“The EU and national governments can create the enabling framework and invest in the

knowledge base”. (European Environment Agency, 2014)

The European Union is the basic institution to set future ambitions, which have to be adopted on national levels. That is why the European Commission set goals for a competitive

and resource efficient transport system for achieving the 60% greenhouse gas (GHG)

emission reduction target. The local E-FACTS projects support the goal, to halve the use of “conventionally-fuelled” cars in urban transport by 2030 and phasing them out in cities by

2050.

GERMANY

“After far more than 100 years of developments in the internal combustion engine, electromobility heralds the dawn of a new technological era in road transport.”

(BMUB, 2009)

In the year 2009, the German government published the German Federal Government’s

National Electromobility Development Plan. The starting point of the paper was, that

electromobility has been identified as a major element and detected as a strategic role in the

German Federal Government’s policy agenda. The corresponding Economic Stimulus

Package II aims at combining near-term economic impacts with strengthening Germany’s

long-term future viability. Referring to the National Development Plan, Electromobility can

make a major contribution to reducing CO² emissions in the transport sector. Of all CO²

emissions in Germany, car traffic causes approx. 14% of it. (BMUB, 2009) In comparison with the statistics of the year of 1990, the general GHG should be reduced by 40% until 2020 and

until 2050 by minimum 80% (BMVI, 2014). Electromobility is also an important factor for a


6

long-term protection of employment and value added. (BMVI, 2014) In 2011, Chancellor

Merkel set the goal “that until 2020, more than one million EVs should be on German

streets.” (Die Bundesregierung, 2011) To reach that goal, the national projects of the

“Electromobility Model Regions” and the “Electromobility Showcases” got implemented in different focus areas. The City of Frankfurt is a member of the regional Model Region Rhine-

Main.

THE NETHERLANDS

Ready to market - ready to innovate and create

(Nederland Elektrisch, 2015)

The Dutch government wants to reach a critical mass of 200.000 electric vehicles on the

roads in the Netherlands by 2020 (Nederland Elektrisch, 2015). To reach that goal, the Dutch

Ministry of Economic Affairs published the national Action Plan for Electric Driving in the year of 2009. With that plan, the Netherlands should become an international laboratory for

electromobility (Delft University of Technology, 2012).

The national Action Plan 2011-2015 shows a further step. The Netherlands are planning to have one million electric vehicles on the streets until 2025. To show the citizens that

electromobility is working, a lot of demonstration projects were carried out. The success of

EVs would improve the quality of life in cities and towns, because the vehicles will produce no emissions and therefore do not need to be excluded from the inner-cities. Another

important factor is the reduction of fossil fuel dependence. The Dutch government focuses

their activities on specific areas as well. Arnhem/Nijmegen is one of these areas, were a lot

of experiments and projects are carried out. (Netherlands Enterprise Agency, 2011)

SWEDEN

Measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must […] be implemented

in several different ways, in parallel.” (City of Stockholm, 2014)

Sweden wants to become an emission-neutral country by 2050. This task seems to be very

ambitious and extensive, because the work required will affect the whole society. To break

down that work, the government started to produce a National Roadmap 2050 (Government

Offices of Sweden, 2015). In comparison to the other two E-FACTS partners, Sweden is

concentrating their activities on the City of Stockholm.


7

In 2014, the City of Stockholm published the Roadmap for a fossil fuel-free Stockholm 2050.

By this document, the City of Stockholm has declared its ambition to be fossil fuel-free by

the year 2050. This document is linked to the Urban Mobility Strategy paper. Until 2050, 40%

more vehicles will be on the street, but the city hopes, that the EU regulations on emission

standards for new vehicles and the price of fossil fuel will minimize the issue. The focus is

also on shifting private to public transport. (City of Stockholm, 2014)


8

3 Quantitative and qualitative surveys

To identify the next generation users and their needs, quantitative and qualitative surveys

were necessary. The E-FACTS project members agreed on the implementation of three

quantitative surveys as well as on qualitative expert interviews.

The project “erster! – Das Handwerk fährt emobil” was carried out in Frankfurt. The users of

the vehicles filled out an online survey. As a supplementary part, a survey with EV tester at a

public event in Frankfurt was another focus. Arnhem had the contact details of people,

asked for a charging pole in their city. This opportunity was used for a third survey regarding

charging issues. To gain comprehensive and international perceptions, experts from the

three different countries were interviewed to evaluate the actual developments in the

sector of electromobility.

3.1 Survey “erster!” – Electric vehicles for craft businesses in Frankfurt

One of the local E-FACTS projects is the financial support of handcraft companies buying electric vehicles for their own fleet. That initiative started in the year of 2013. With the

support of the cities of Frankfurt, Wiesbaden and the State of Hesse, 37 companies were

equipped with EVs. In the beginning of the project, the companies could choose an EV from

an explicit list of vehicles. After a short period of time, this limitation was abolished. The companies were now free, to choose a Battery Electric Vehicle, (BEV), a Range Extended

Electric Vehicle (REEV) or a Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) with a maximum CO²-

emission of 50g/km.

3.1.1 Objectives

The objective of that survey was, to identify handcraft companies as one of the best fitting

inner-city businesses to adopt electromobility in their daily mobility. Furthermore, the EVs

should be visible in the cities to make them a part of the daily routine. Negative prejudices

should be disproved as well.

3.1.2 Methods

A three-tier survey concept is the basis of that project. Just before the EV was delivered to

the handcraft company, the Frankfurt UAS contacted the handcraft company, to ask them to take part in the first initial survey (T0). With that survey, general mobility behavior,

expectations on the EVs, cost aspects and socio demographic data could be captured.


9

Additionally, the contact person of the companies received a list of ID-numbers, which the

contact person had to distribute to the other users in the company. With the ID-system, a

combination of the surveys can indicate long-term changings in the mobility behavior. The

ID-system is totally anonymous and no personal inferences can be drawn. The interim survey

(T1) should be filled out after the fifth use of the EV. It is similar to (T0), but first experiences

get documented as well. In the end of the project, the users filled out the subsequent

recovery (T2). This survey is based on the findings of previous surveys and contains detailed

questions referring long-term use of EVs.

Overall, 217 ID-numbers were distributed to the contact persons of the companies. This

amount reflects the number of the potential EV-users. The challenge of this survey was, to

motivate the users to participate in the questionnaire. The responsible persons of the

companies were contacted several times, to motivate their colleagues to participate in the

online-surveys.

3.1.3 Results

The results of the chapter were analyzed in five different ways. The amount of completed

questionnaires is varying between 24 and 40:

• T0: Initial survey, (n=40)

• T1: Interim Survey, (n=24)

• T2: Subsequent recovery, (n=38)

• CS: Cumulated bowdlerized statistics; aggregated data from all three surveys, (n=individual)

• DEV: Development of the attitude during the whole evaluation period, (n=individual)

http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/bowdlerized.html


10

>> Smaller vehicles are preferred, but the source of energy is not green. <<

According to the user group of handcraft companies, one would expect that handcraft

companies choose a bigger vehicle, to transport their machineries and equipment. But the

cumulated statistic shows, that the Smart fortwo electric drive was the car, the interviewed

persons used the most. The Smart is followed by the Renault Twizy and the Renault Zoe

(Figure 1). It is important to note, that some companies had two or even more vehicles

funded.

Figure 1: Type of vehicles (CS)

The source of energy is one of the most deciding factors regarding the eco-friendliness of

EVs. Figure 2 is showing that the majority of the respondents don’t use green electricity to

charge their car.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Sonstige

Nissan Leaf

Mitsubishi Outlander

Renault Kangoo Z.E.

Volkswagen e-Golf

Mitsubishi i-MiEV

Opel Ampera

BMW i3

Renault Zoe Z.E.

Renault Twizy

Smart fortwo electric drive

[number of responses]

Which electric vehicle did your company choose? (n=40)


11

Figure 2: Source of energy (CS)

>> A vehicle is used by several people per day on several days a week <<

The initial survey identified that the EVs of the handcraft companies were used in two thirds

of the cases by two or three different persons per day. Six out of 40 respondents said that

the car will be used by 4 or even more people a day (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Users per day (T0)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

no answer

no

yes, with seal of quality

yes


Do you obtain green electricity? (n=50)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

1 person (just me)

2 persons

3 persons

4 persons

6 persons


How many different drivers use your electric vehicle per day? (n=40)


12

After driving the EV for a longer period of time, more than half of the respondents said, that

they used the EV (almost) daily. Just three out of 38 people used the EV less than one day

per month (Figure 4). Comparing the development of all three surveys (DEV), especially how

often the car was planned to use or was finally used, the trend in all the three surveys is a

“regular daily use” or a “usage of 1-3 days per week”. The “almost never“ and “rarely” usage

answer wasn’t given more than five times in any of the surveys.

Figure 4: Usage of the electric vehicle (T2)

In the context of the usage, it is important to mention that the question of the EV usage was

answered similar in questionnaire (T0) and (T1). The majority of the people used the car

mainly or only for business reasons. But around one out of three users used the EV for

business and for private purposes.

>> Handcraft companies are a perfect target group for the usage of EVs, because they drive

a short daily distance <<

The daily route of handcraft companies is usually concentrated on inner-city distances. The results of the initial survey (Figure 5) show a varying result of the distances which are driven

for business purposes per day. The most given answer is 21-50 km a day per car. Nowadays,

the standard range of EVs covers 37 of 38 answers without any range problems. Just one person marked a distance more than 100 km per day and car. The average of the distances,

which is covered privately with the electric vehicles per day, is much lower. The answers

0 5 10 15 20

(almost) daily

1 - 3 days per week

1 - 3 days per month

rarely

almost never


How often have you used the electric vehicle until now? (n=38)


13

with 1-5 and 6-10 km are chosen most often. 10 users chose “no answer”. This can be

justified by the fact, that the users are not aware of their daily driven distances.

Figure 5: Distances on business per day (T0)

An assessment of the average range of a full-electric vehicle without a range-extender shows

a realistic estimation of the users of 123 km.

Analyzing a further estimation of the users, which range an EV should cover at least, the attitude of the interim survey and the subsequent recovery vary a lot. The answers of the

interim survey show a very heterogeneous distribution of the answers (Figure 6). 21 of 38

users answered in the subsequent recovery, that the range should be more than 250 km, that an EV would be a realistic option for them (Figure 7). This trend is surprising, because

during the time of use, the drivers figured out that the range of the EVs is sufficient for most

of them.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

no answer

1 - 5 km

6 - 10 km

11 - 15 km

16 - 20 km

21 - 50 km

51 - 100 km

more than 100 km


Which distance do you cover on business with the electric vehicle per day? (n=38)


14

Figure 6: Necessary range (T1)

Figure 7: Necessary range (T2)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

range up to 50 km

range up to 100 km

range up to 150 km

range up to 200 km

range up to 250 km

range of more than 250 km


Which range should an electric vehicle at least cover, to be an option for you? (n=24)

0 5 10 15 20 25

range up to 50 km

range up to 100 km

range up to 150 km

range up to 200 km

range up to 250 km

range of more than 250 km


Which range should an electric vehicle at least cover, to be an option for you? (n=38)


15

>> Charging at work is easy, public charging entails some issues <<

After a long-term usage (T2), 27 out of 38 users said that they charged their EV at work at a

single parking space. 14 users charged the car at home at a private charging option. 31 out of

38 users agreed with the hypothesis, that the charging time is too long. Another charging

issue is, that there are too less charging points in public and semi-public spaces. 29 users

agreed with this hypothesis. The hypothesis, that charging points are hard to find and billing

systems of the electricity costs are too complicated wasn’t agreed a lot (13/9 out of 38).

As already mentioned before, a main focus is charging infrastructure in public space. The

next question in the subsequent recovery identified the main criteria of public charging

stations by their importance. The best ranked criteria are the “reserved parking spaces for

electric vehicles at charging points”. The second most important criteria is the “easy

access/well signposted” followed by point, that “charging should be usable independent

from the electric grid provider”.

33 out of 37 users support the idea of a dense network of public charging infrastructure, that electromobility will be successful and that electromobility gain acceptance in their private

surroundings (T2).

A further deciding factor is the time, the electric vehicle is standing on the companies ground. That time can be used for charging. In just 4 out of 27 cases, the vehicle will be just

1-5 hours nearby or on the ground of the company, which could cause temporal problems

concerning charging time. But in the all other cases, charging at the company ground

wouldn’t be a timing problem (T0).

Charging at home wouldn’t be an issue for the users. 37 of 57 people answered, that they

have a (potential) charging possibility at home. Just 3 out of 57 people said, that they have

no charging possibility at home (CS). If users would take their car back home, they wouldn’t

have a problem to charge it overnight.

>> The EV is not used as a main transport mode <<

The first question in the interim survey was, if the EV is the main mode of transport for

business purposes. That wasn’t the case for 14 of 24 users. Eight respondents answered, that

the electric vehicle was the main mode of transport. This trend is even clearer in the private usage; 21 of 24 respondents didn’t use the electric vehicle as the main mode of transport.

If one looks at the mode of transport, which was used beside the electric vehicle, there is no

significant variance of results comparing the initial and the interim survey. In these two


16

surveys, it was already prompted, why people used another mode of transport beside the

EV. The most given answers were the “pleasure of use with the other vehicles” and “to get

to work since the availability of the electric vehicle is not always guaranteed” because the EV

is just a business car and/or not personal dedicated.

>> The overall assessment of the EV is mostly positive <<

In the interim survey, the users had the possibility, to evaluate the driving performance of

their EV. By rating statements with “1” (don’t agree at all) up to “6” (totally agree), the users

could express their opinions. The best evaluated statement is the good acceleration (5.42),

followed by pleasant driving noises (5.25) and a high driving pleasure (5.21). The lowest

points got the statement of an appropriate maximum speed with still 4.08 points (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Driving performance (T1)

The same scheme was used for the question concerning the assessment regarding costs that

arise from the EVS purchase and usage. An average grading with 3.54 out of 6 points got the

current expenses (electricity costs, insurance and taxes). The maintenance and service costs

were evaluated with 3.08 points. Low purchase costs (e.g. purchase price/lease payments)

got evaluated with just 2.29 out of 6 points (T1).

5.25

4.54

4.08

5.42

5.21

1 2 3 4 5 6

pleasant driving noises

high driving comfort

aprropriate maximum speed

good acceleration

high driving pleasure

How do you evaluate the electric vehicle's driving performance? (n=24)

don't agree at all totally agree


17

For private businesses it is important, that the integration of new innovations doesn’t have

any negative influence on the operational processes. As seen in Figure 9, this issue didn’t

come up for 22 of 24 respondents after a long-term usage (T2).

Figure 9: Problems in the operational process (T2)

In the subsequent recovery, users were able to elucidate their opinion about the problems

which may occur during the usage. But for 33 out of 38 users, no problems with the vehicles

occur.

During the whole survey period (DEV), no significant dissenting opinions where identified, where users could agree to some statements about purchasing an EV. The statement, where

most of the users in the initial and interim survey agreed, was; “I would pay less for an

electric vehicle, if I had to adjust my mobility behavior”. The statement “electric vehicles are just a passing trend - the future is about other driving technologies” was not rated with

more than 2 out of 6 points in any of the three surveys.

One of the most important factors is the purchase price, that potential users are willing to pay extra or less for an EV in comparison to a conventional vehicle. The development in that

field didn’t change significant during the three surveys; The majority is willing to pay the

same price for both technologies. But comparing the willingness of paying more or less for an EV, a lot more people would spend more for an EV than for a conventional vehicle (Figure

10).

0 5 10 15 20 25

no

yes


Did the usage of electric vehicles generate any problems in the operational process? (n=24)


18

Figure 10: Willingness of the purchase price (T0)

>> The demographic data reflects the average person, working in that business <<

Demographic data is always important to show, which kind of people participated in a survey

and how representative it is.

The handcraft sector is nowadays dominated by men. Same trend can be found in the

question of the gender. 44 of 57 respondents are men and just eleven are women. More

than half of them are between 41 and 60 years old. 13 respondents are between 21 and 40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

no answer

more than 25% below the purchase price of aconventional vehicle

21 - 25% below

16 - 20% below

11 - 15% below

6 - 10% below

less than 5% below

the same

less than 5% above

6 - 10% above

11 - 15% above

16 - 20% above

21 - 25% above

more than 25% above the purchase price of aconventional vehicle


Would you be willing to pay more or less for an EV than for a conventional vehicle? (n=40)


19

and just two of them are younger than 21. Just 16 out of 57 respondents have an A-level

degree. That is probably, why just ten respondents went to university. The position in the

company of the respondents is very different. Starting from the management, down to

employees without any management or personal responsibility, every level was mentioned

in a more or less balanced way (CS). The initial survey shows that most of the (T0)-respondents are working in the motor vehicle

sector (9 out of 26 answers). Four users are working in the construction industry and the

same amount in the electrical sector.

>> Various findings <<

In the initial survey, the users evaluated a list of driving purposes. The handcraft companies

agree mainly with the “usage of the car for customer and on-site visits”. In private use, they

would prefer an electric vehicle mainly for “commuting to the workplace” and “further

shopping or leisure activities”.

A variety of incentives, that could make electromobility more attractive are being discussed.

In the subsequent recovery, the users could rate a couple of incentives by their importance.

The most important incentives are the direct purchase premium, followed by the lower or exemption of the motor vehicle taxes and discounted or free charging.

Users, who answered the subsequent recovery, have a lot of experiences with electro-

mobility. It would be desirable that they share their positive impressions. Everybody communicated their experiences while most of the users (33 out of 38) talked about their

experience in their professional and private environment (Figure 11).


20

Figure 11: Communication of the experiences (T2)

Regarding the usage of the vehicle, 30 of 52 people answered in the questionnaire, that the

car is a company car for internal use by several employees. Just eight persons use the vehicle

for themselves as a kind of exclusive usage (CS).

Résumé

The “erster!”-survey shows, that the handcraft companies are a perfect target group for the usage of inner-city electromobility. Hard facts like problems with range, infrastructure and a

negative influence on the daily operations could be disproved. The soft facts, like the

attitude towards EVs or the communication of experiences, were all answered in a positive way. Of course, the participation could have been better to have a more representative

result, but first trends can be seen even with a low number of respondents.

0 10 20 30 40

yes, in my professional and privateenvironment

yes, but only in my professional environment

yes, but only in my private surroundings


Do you communicate your experiences with electromobility in your personal environment? (n=38)


21

3.2 Survey “Klassikstadt” – First experiences with electric vehicles

Within the framework of the Frankfurt automotive-exhibition, the event “Elektromobilität in

Frankfurt am Main – Erleben was die Zukunft bewegt!” took place on the 27th of April 2014.

Guests of the event had the possibility, to test drive an EV. They could choose between

different brands and models.

3.2.1 Objectives

The event was used to capture further experiences of EV drivers in Frankfurt.

3.2.2 Methods

Coordinated with the Frankfurt Economic Development, a questionnaire was developed, to

capture the experiences of people, testing an EV. Overall, 30 people were interviewed. The survey was quite basic, because people had to be interviewed on the street, immediately

after the test drive. The questionnaire contains eight questions plus socio-demographic data.

3.2.3 Results

27 out of 30 interviewed people were male and just three female. Almost half of the test

drivers were between 41 and 60 years old. Just one person was younger than 20 years, ten people between 21 and 40 years and one person older than 60 years.

Most of the people choose a Tesla for their test drive. The Tesla is followed by the

Volkswagen E-up and the Opel Ampera. For two thirds of the people, it was the first time

they have used an EV. The other ten people used an electric vehicle several times for private reasons. Just one person used it for a business reason as well.

The main purpose for using an EV are shopping and commuting, followed by activities and

the education of children (Figure 12). The most important conditions are the long range and

short charging times. An easy use, safety and a high driving comfort got not rated as that

important (Figure 13).


22

Figure 12: Purposes of travel

Figure 13: Important using conditions

25

21

18

15

13

5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

shopping

commute

activities

education of children

kindergarten

travel

[number of mentions]

[tra

vel p

urpo

ses]

For which travel purposes do you see good uses for electric vehicles in the private sector? (n=28, multiple answers possible)

20

16

12

12

11

9

7

0 5 10 15 20 25

Long range

Short charging time

quiet engines

cost effectiveness

high driving comfort

safety

easy to use

[number of mentions]

[con

ditio

ns]

Which conditions are important when you use an electric vehicle? (n=30, multiple answers possible)


23

As an overall conclusion for this survey, one can say that the test-drive at the event was a

good idea, to bring guests in contact with the technology of electromobility. Furthermore,

the experiences are mostly positive and the test drivers got a thought-provoking impulse to

think about a purchase of an EV.

http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/thought-provoking.html

http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/impulse.html


24

3.3 Survey “Arnhem” – Demand of public charging facilities

Together with the City of Arnhem, a further survey was carried out. In the Arnhem survey,

the focus was on charging infrastructure. That issue was chosen, because the City is

interested in the issues and challenges of charging infrastructure.

3.3.1 Objectives

The main objectives of this survey are, the identification of the problems and needs of EV

users in Arnhem. Furthermore the City should get information about the main reasons for

buying an electric car as well as basic socio-demographic data about the EV drivers in the

city.

3.3.2 Methods In coordination with the City of Arnhem, an online survey was developed. This online survey

was justified for people, asked the city for a charging pole. That means that people,

participating in the survey, are already users or future users of EVs. The survey was conceptualized in English language. With the support of academic colleagues and the City of

Arnhem, the survey got translated into Dutch. Afterwards, the survey was integrated in an

online survey tool and the link got distributed to the target group by the City of Arnhem.

3.3.3 Results

Unfortunately, just ten people took part in the online survey. Even several ways to generate

and motivate new people to participate in that survey weren’t successful. Evaluating a

quantitative survey with just 10 responses wouldn’t be scientifically correct. That is the

reason, why this survey wasn’t evaluated during the period of this E-FACTS project.


25

3.4 Expert interviews

The overall objective of this work package is to identify the next generation users and their

needs as well as general current issues concerning electric mobility. Next to the qualitative

analyses, qualitative research methods have been applied as well.

3.4.1 Objectives

The goal of this survey was, to get an overview from international experts about the

developments concerning electromobility. Common opinions and similar ideas should be

detected and displayed in simple graphics.

3.4.2 Methods

Experts from all participating countries took part in a personal interview. Due to geographical distances, the interviews were made by telephone. With the support of the

local project partners, a reasonable selection of representative experts from involved sectors

was made. Finally, 24 experts from universities/research institutions, public administrations, free economy and consulting companies could be interviewed.

3.4.3 Results

Ten of the interviewed experts were from Germany, eight from Sweden and six from the Netherlands (Figure 14). That imbalance came about, because of the different amount of

experts the local partners provided and because of some short-term cancellations of

interviews.

Figure 14: Experts’ origin

10

6

8

experts' origin (n=24)

Germany

Netherlands

Sweden


26

Clustered by the type of institution, five experts are employed at a university or research

institute, nine experts are working in a public administration (city administration, federal

ministries or national authorities) and ten experts are employees of consulting or private

companies. All experts are professional involved in projects or strategic decisions dealing

with electromobility (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Experts clustered by type of institution

To get a meaningful comparison of interviews with experts from different countries with a

varying professional background, the questions were conceptualized quite general and orientated to international issues. Electromobility has a very wide field of applications. The

possible applications are always depending on technical processes and the social willingness

of the society to adapt new innovations. Therefore, the first question of the interview was

termed as follows:

Question 1: In which field of application, electromobility is a useful instrument?

The analysis of the answers shows that the spectrum of possible applications is not fixed at

one certain mode or user group, but a certain trend can be determined. The most given

answer was the integration of EVs in fleets of public administrations.

“On a local level, many actors interact with each other. Governmental bodies are a central

actor in that local network. They know a lot of people and can contribute to the success of

electric mobility.” (Assistant professor of a Dutch University)

Furthermore, private companies with a predictable daily driving distance would be another

focus group. Besides handcraft companies, health care services were mentioned as well.

These companies would have the advantage, that most of them could charge the vehicle at

5

9

10

experts clustered by type of institution (n=24)

university/research

public administration

consulting/priv.company


27

their company grounds. Also commuters with a moderate daily driving distance were

mentioned in the private sector as one specific focus group.

Regarding the mode of transport, especially pedelecs (pedal electric cycles) were mentioned

as one suitable mode, besides public transport. A lot of public transport vehicles are already

electrified for a lot of decades. A head of an electromobility model region in Germany points

out, that an improvement of electrified buses would be a good next step because most of

the trains are already running by electricity.

An operator of one of the biggest German airport is already using electric vehicles for apron

operations:

“I think that specialized vehicles are a promising chance to try out some experiments by switching from conventional to battery electric engines.” (Representative of an international

airport operator)

Looking at the spatial relation, all experts say that the focus of electromobility is on city

traffic at the moment. Rural areas are important as well, but that should be focused at a later stage of development. A professor from a Dutch University noted that electric mobility

should be applied where zero or low emissions are required. As a result, cities and their

municipalities would profit by improving their air quality statistics.

Question 2: Which national incentives do you advocate? Why?

The second question was the question with the most variations of answers. The kinds of

answer were not related to the type of institution or the origin of the expert. Taken that into

account, to define a general trend for this question is not possible.

The experts have various opinions about financial incentives in their countries and in general. Tax refunds, purchase subsidies, road tax exemptions and support of research and

development were evaluated and prioritized in different ways. The following statements

represent the numerous varieties of responses.

German quotes

“I think that a symbolic national support could be purchase incentives. That could be

expanded by tax reductions for example.” (Representative of a German grid operator)

„National incentives should be invested for research and development as well as for

commercialization of innovative mobility.” (Representative of a Hessian ministry)


28

Dutch quotes

“I think, the incentives that we had, were quite interesting for a lot of people. Many people

made use of that. That is the main reason why you can see a lot of electric vehicles or plugin-

hybrids on the road here in the Netherlands.” (Professor of a Dutch University)

“I heard somebody I know from a car producer and he said, […] that people should not expect

electric cars to become cheaper because if the producers get improvements in batteries, they

will use it to increase the vehicle range rather than decrease the price.” (Representative of a

Dutch Automobile Association).

Swedish quotes

“I think the Swedish government could copy-paste what they are doing in Norway, because it's really working.” (Representative of a Swedish City Department)

“In Sweden we don't have a registration tax at all. So we cannot reduce it from electric

vehicles. But we could do it the other way around. Not giving a benefit to the electric cars,

like the Swedish government do it today, with a “super clean car premium”, rather have a registration tax for every new car and take it away for clean vehicles” (Representative of a

Swedish City Department).

Question 3: Which national measures do you wish to be implemented?

Charging infrastructure is the predominant answer for the third question. In all three

countries, there is a need for a national strategy approaching the establishment of charging

points. The general opinion is, that charging infrastructure is necessary in public space as

well as on private territories. Citizens should be aware of public infrastructure to make sure

that they have the possibility to charge their vehicle in public areas even if most of the

charging operations are made at home. Nevertheless, there is no business model for

charging infrastructure yet.

“Everybody wants it, but very few seem to actually need it or use it. So actually the business

model is relatively complicated because you putting it up and very few are going to use it.” (Representative of a Swedish City Department)

Due to limited resources and knowledge gaps, there is also the desire for guidelines and

business perspectives the municipalities could use for implementing electromobility

measures.


29

“This is a very diverse picture around the Netherlands. Arnhem has a very open and stimulating policy. Smaller cities in the Netherlands don't have structured ideas of charging

infrastructure.” (Representative of a Dutch Grid Operator)

A professor of a Swedish University emphasizes the importance of e-mobility in new housing

areas. They should be prepared and equipped with charging infrastructure. He justifies it by

the fact that the most important charging point would be at home for overnight charging.

A representative of a German grip operator points out, that they would profit by improving

through electromobility courses in vocational schools in Germany. The trainees are the

future engineers and they have to get a fundamental knowledge of the actual technical

developments.

Question 4:

Do you think that it is necessary to promote electromobility projects on EU-level? If yes, which benefit do you expect out of it?

More than three-quarters of the experts have a positive attitude towards electromobility

projects on EU-level. The most important elements of EU-projects are the exchange of knowledge and learning from good practice examples. The European wide standardization of

charging infrastructure is another reason for supporting international projects. Some experts

mentioned, based on their own experience, the complex application and implementation procedure as an issue for improvement.

“The other thing that you may gain is that you have a more critical mass and more research

coordination.” (Professor of a Dutch University)

Figure 16: Distribution of the opinions towards EU-projects

19

4 1

distribution of the opinions towards EU-projects (n=24)

positive

neutral

negative


30

A Representative of a Dutch city administration mentioned, that European-wide projects are

necessary, because cars do not stop at the city or national border. He says that there is

a nationwide system in the Netherlands, where one can use the same card to charge the

car on all public charging points (located in a nearly all Dutch cities). But if you cross the

border to Germany, you have to get another card to be able to charge your car and pay for

it. International projects could help to solve those standardization problems.

“I think it is necessary to have both; regional/national projects with in the country and of course multi-national projects on European level. I think the best benefit for Sweden in the

European projects is the exchange of knowledge, because Sweden is not a leader in electric

mobility. Countries like the Netherlands for example are way ahead in charging infrastructure.” (Representative of an organization for the Swedish power industry)

Question 5: What do you think of the future development of electromobility?

This question was asked very open on purpose. Nevertheless, the answers were more or less

similar. Regarding the electric engine and the powertrain, most of the experts are convinced,

that the hybrid technology will be the dominating system during the upcoming years. The predicted increase of EVs is supported by the integration of electromobility in fleets of public

administrations and private companies.

The increase of cars will be reinforced by the air quality directive of the European Commission. Countries and cities are forced to improve the CO²-emissions. This will have

positive impacts on the development of electromobility.

“I think the main chances are of course that you need to reduce the demand of energy and

also move for more sustainable energy and the electric vehicles have their advantages and you will need it in some way to reach the climate objectives and I think it will be very difficult

to reach those objectives if you do not have electric vehicles.” (Representative of a Swedish

Transport Administration)

A German Professor for Sociology challenged that the future of electromobility should

always be seen as a component of a complex multimodal and intermodal system. Future

needs for mobility, this has been another argument of the professor, have to be seen as

embedded in the dynamics of demographic change.

A German Expert working for a grid provider points out the importance of well-prepared

electric grids. That would be the main challenge for companies working in that field.

A Dutch expert is worried about the various national subsidy systems which are triggering

problems especially in the second hand market:


31

“The second hand electric cars are already at the market. And normally that would mean that now regular people like you and me would be able to buy these cars. Unfortunately

what we are achieving now, is that second hand electric cars are leaving the country to

Norway especially because they pay a lot for second hand electric cars in Norway. […] If Norway would not have those incentives, the car would stay in the country and the normal

people like you and me could buy an electric car.” (Representative of a Dutch Consulting

Company)

An expert from a Dutch grid operator claims a current issue. He says that the European

countries strive for an independency of energy production as well as for an independency of

the leading countries in oil production. These developments would support the success of

electromobility.

Question 6:

What will be the dominating engine in the future? Is the hydrogen engine a rival or more a

complementary factor compared to the battery electric engine?

The majority of the experts see the two addressed technologies as a complementary factor (Figure 17). Both of the technologies could be successful in the future. If they will be

successful, they would also profit from each other instead of being rivals. The battery

electric technology will be preferred for short distance trips. The fuel-cell cars will be used for middle or long distance trips. A representative of the Hessian Ministry of Economics,

Energy, Transport, and Regional Development, who advocates both technologies, mentioned

that it is easier and cheaper to set up charging infrastructure for battery technology instead

of hydrogen filling stations.

“I think it depends on whose perspective you take. For people working only on battery electric

cars, like some small companies or people that promote electric infrastructure, any other

alternative is a rival because it may be a rival for subsidies. But if you look at it from the perspective of the car industry, than these technologies can help each other.”

(Representative of a Dutch electromobility association)


32

Figure 17: Development of different e-mobility technologies

Selection of additional comments

The experts had the chance to add any additional comments after the general questions. The following statements are the most relevant quotes;

“I wish that the funded projects are compatible with each other and sustainable in the

future.” (Representative of the Hessian Ministry of Economics, Energy, Transport, and Regional Development)

"Governments have to play an important role in the transition towards electromobility and

stimulating it because of the air quality and fossil energy issues. But in the end electromobility is a task for the market. Governments don´t produce any cars, governments

don´t produce energy or oil. It is completely marked driven: When people want to drive

electric cars because it is cheaper or better, they will buy them and that is the final solution

for electric mobility.” (Representative of a Dutch city administration)

“What I think is very interesting, […] is the attitude of the society towards the mobility

behavior, which is changing quite rapidly. Not only here in the Netherlands, it is a worldwide

trend. That is something to take into account.” (Professor from a Dutch University)

“It is interesting to know, if we are already coming to a market breakthrough or not. We had

electric vehicles for the last 30 years and everybody said it is going to come in ten years and

we still say that it is coming in big numbers in ten years. But it is still a niche product. Not everybody is committed. On the other hand, today more or less every OEM has an EV or a

PHEV car model for sale; this has not been the case before. There is also a much stronger

19

1 4

development of different e-mobility technologies (n=24)

complementary

not complementary

no clear statement


33

push from governments and a climate concern and awareness that has not been seen earlier. I really hope that what we see now is the start of a breakthrough for EVs!” (Representative

of a Swedish city administration)

“I think one of the most important things is […] that the users find the charging infra-structure. The systems or the databases for geographical and other information systems of

the charging infrastructure are necessary.” (Representative of an organization for the

Swedish power industry)

“[…] pedelecs are already very popular in the Netherlands and that has also to do with the

aging population. Electric assisted bicycles have already taken 16% of sales in the

Netherlands and that is really very strong.” (Representative of a Dutch electromobility

association)

“If you would have interviewed me as an electric driver, I would have answered completely

different.” (Representative of a Dutch consulting company)

Combining analyses and résumé

Combining analyses, where all responses of the experts working at universities/research

institutes compared with the answers of those working at a public administration e.g., did not show significant results. The individual opinions are independent from country and

professional field.

To conclude, a positive and quite optimistic attitude concerning the actual developments

and future expectations for the sector and technology of electric mobility can be

determined. It was emphasized, that the technology establishment may take a longer time

than the assumption couple of years ago. Almost every expert is convinced that

electromobility will get a breakthrough earlier or later.


34

4 Conclusion and Outlook

The results of the survey identify the actual advantages, disadvantages and especially issues

of different focus groups. The basic for the motivation of the participating country is the

reduction of inner-city CO² emissions, which is based on the European GHG emission targets.

The “erster!” survey in Frankfurt is an analysis with a small target group, but it represents

that the handcraft companies are one of the best inner-city commercial users for driving

electric. Charging and range problems didn’t occur for the majority of the companies. Also

the operational processes of the companies were not influenced in a negative way. The

users are enthusiastic about their experiences and communicate their positive lessons

learned to colleagues, families and friends.

The focus of the “Arnhem” survey would have been very interesting, because the focus

group are private people, which are interested or already owning an EV. But because of the

low number of responses, a scientifically correct analysis wasn’t possible.

The “Expert interviews” where the most comprehensive qualitative survey. They also convey

a positive attitude of international experts about the future development of electromobility,

even if the technology establishment may take a longer time than the assumption couple of years ago.

With all these surveys, potential user groups, their needs and behavioral aspects were

identified. Especially the handcraft companies can be confirmed as perfect target group for electromobility.

E-FACTS was a project, with a lot of different local activities of the project partners. The local

projects had different focuses and were even concentrated on different transport modes.

That led to the decision, not directly link the accompanying research to all the local projects.

The expert interviews were the best way, to gain international comparative results.

A further important outcome of the project is the international exchange of knowledge. Next

to project related discussions, the project meetings were also used to share information

about local standards and strategies handling electromobility issues and developments.

During the meetings, local experts presented several projects and shared their knowledge

with the project members. That was an enormous profit for all participating partners, to

develop their international and professional network.


35

After the draft of the first project proposal, single project partners changed. The update of

the proposal was postponed. The coordination between the partners and the

communication of the local projects was neglected. After the approval of the project, the

partners tried their best to round off the proposal, but unfortunately not all intentions of the

proposal could be carried out during the project duration.

The idea of the project is an encouraging basis for further projects in the field of

international electromobility projects. For the part of the accompanying research, it would

be necessary that the local projects are more uniform and comparable.


36

University of Applied Sciences Frankfurt

The University of Applied Sciences Frankfurt (Frankfurt UAS) offers practice-oriented study

programs of a high academic standard, opening the way to a broad range of attractive

professions. The four faculties and over 30 study programs reflect the academic profile of

the university. The application-oriented research gears education to the realities of

professional life and the international orientation smoothes the way to the global job

market.

The university is linked to the local and regional community in numerous ways: Links with

industries mainly focus on research and development projects and on industry placements

for the students. The university professors keep excellent relationships to companies. The

university runs an extensive continuing education program for professionals and offers in-

house trainings for companies and non-profit organizations. The university uses its close contacts to companies, institutions and associations to continually expand its political,

economic and social dialogue.


The research group of Prof. Dr.-Ing. Petra K. Schäfer belongs to the Faculty 1: Architecture,

Civil engineering and Geomatics of the Frankfurt UAS. The interdisciplinary team is staffed by traffic-, city- and infrastructure planners. The teaching part of the department is handling

the topics of traffic planning and mobility. The research focus is on electromobility, traffic

management and acceptance of new technologies in that field.

Contact details

Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences


www.frankfurt-university.de/verkehr

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Petra K. Schäfer Dominic Hofmann M. Sc.

Professor for Traffic Planning Research Assistant

phone: +49 (0)69 1533-2797 phone: +49 (0)69 1533-2351

e-Mail: [email protected] e-Mail: [email protected]


37

References

BMUB. (2009). German Federal Government’s National Electromobility Development Plan.

BMVI. (2014). Genehmigungsprozess der E-Ladeinfrastruktur in Kommunen: Strategische und

rechliche Fragen.

BMVI. (2014). Öffentliche Ladeinfrastruktur für Städte, Kommunen und Versorger.

City of Stockholm. (2014). Roadmap for a fossil fuel-free Stockohlm 2050.

Delft University of Technology. (2012). Electric mobility policies in the North Sea Region countries.

Die Bundesregierung. (2011). Leitmarkt und Leitanbieter für Elektromobilität. Abgerufen am 23. 04

2015 von http://www.bundesregierung.de/Webs/Breg/DE/Themen/Energiewende/Mobilitaet/

podcast/_node.html

European Commission. (2011). WHITE PAPER - Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area –

Towards a competitive and resource. Brussels.

European Environment Agency. (2014). Adaptation of transport to climate change in Europe, EEA

Report.

Government Offices of Sweden. (2015). Sweden - an emissions-neutral country by 2050. Abgerufen

am 27. 04 2015 von http://www.government.se/sb/d/5745/a/181428

Nederland Elektrisch. (2013). E-mobility in the Netherlands.

Nederland Elektrisch. (2015). Nederland Elektrisch. Von http://www.nederlandelektrisch.nl/english/

abgerufen

Netherlands Enterpirse Agency. (2011). Electric Mobility gets up to speed.

Results of “E-FACTS” WP4

Documents

Transcript of Results of “E-FACTS” WP4